[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4759bf58-0e9f-4d06-8b8a-d33df378c003@lunn.ch>
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 20:39:39 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
David Epping <david.epping@...singlinkelectronics.com>,
Harini Katakam <harini.katakam@....com>,
"Russell King (Oracle)" <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 1/3] net: phy: extend PHY package API to support
multiple global address
> Well yes I think we should assume those API to be called only in
> config_once context or in package context. But is it Panic ok? I would
> at least use something like BUG() to give descriptive warning instead of
> NULL pointer exception. What do you think?
BUG() is way too strong. It causes an immediate stop of everything,
and probably file system data loss and a reboot. WARN_ON() is
generally no better.
An Opps gives a stack trace, which is what you need to find the bug,
and kills the process. Generally, you can do a controlled shutdown,
without any losses.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists